To Deposit, Or Not to Deposit? What is my Best Path Forward?

After a lengthy absence, I've been playing online consistently for a couple of weeks now. I'm enjoying the game again.

I've been playing mostly 2NL cash games just to get the feel of it again, and some micro sng's. It was my plan to ultimately choose one or the other to focus on going forward, and I've made my decision. Cash games.

SNG's are starting to bore me a little, and I'm being reminded how the swings can be pretty nutty. So going forward, I'd like to focus on cash games. 6-max, 2 tables at a time. No fast fold.

Unless somebody can make a compelling argument as to why I should take a different approach, I'm thinking that I won't focus on moving up in stakes for a while. I'd like to stick with a particular level for a defined period of time, and just focus on improving my game. As an example, I could commit to playing 2NL exclusively for 3 months. At the end of that period, I could take stock of where I am and where I want to go.

This brings me to my main question. I have about $30 in my account. I haven't made a deposit in ages, as I really haven't been playing. 2-tabling 2NL, I'm probably rolled enough to get started. But is there an advantage for me if I made a deposit and started with 5NL or 10NL instead?

I could certainly afford the deposit. But I don't want to unless there is a benefit in doing so. Would playing 10NL for 3 months somehow be better than 2NL for 3 months, in terms of studying the game and putting in the effort to be a better player?

I'm not comfortable at 25NL or above yet, just to be clear on that point. My debate is really just between 2NL, 5NL, or 10NL.

Any input is appreciated. I'm soon to be looking for a study method to commit to as well. But that will be a different post.

the difficulty you face is that for canadians a lot of rooms don't accept new canadian signups and those that do have serely cut back the number of deposit options available to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keith

the difficulty you face is that for canadians a lot of rooms don't accept new canadian signups and those that do have serely cut back the number of deposit options available to them.

---

I'm not concerned about this. The deposit options on Pokerstars/Full Tilt seem to be the same as they always were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PrairieMuffinKicker

I could certainly afford the deposit. But I don't want to unless there is a benefit in doing so. Would playing 10NL for 3 months somehow be better than 2NL for 3 months, in terms of studying the game and putting in the effort to be a better player?

---

There's a benefit to proving to yourself that you can definitely beat 2NL.

It's still the easiest level of play to beat 'cause minimal investment draws noobs. Also 'cause if you're beating [stake] then you'll move up and on to the next highest stake if you're a serious player... so more fish at the bottom.

There's a benefit to learning how to beat players whose understanding of poker is relatively simple-minded. I'm not saying they are simple-minded, but that they're noobs at learning a highly complex game and are categorically overconfident in their skills. They think certain moves are more valuable than they are and they over-value being "tricky." In short, all you need to beat 2NL is to learn to play ABC poker with minimal bluffs and sensible opening ranges.

This is the first fundamental hurdle to get past. Learning what ABC poker is and how valuable it is to play that way. It's important to know that, while it may seem like 2NL players are adjusting to your play, they almost definitely are not. So that helps you understand that a bit of variance happening doesn't mean you need to adjust your strategy... it's literally nothing.

Then there's the added bonus of knowing that since you can def. beat some stakes, that you only ever need to make withdrawals from your poker fund. As long as you employ a solid BR management strategy, you will never have less than enough to crush some low-stakes poker.

Also... your winrate in bb/100 hands will almost definitely be higher, the lower stakes you play.

Softer opponents means more big wins. It's not the rate in bb/100 hand that improves your BR, though... it's $$/hand, and the reduced winrate in bb/100 hands can still make a greater winrate in $$/hand when you move up... but at the price of higher variance.

If you aren't making at least 5 bb/100 hands at 2NL, then you prob can stand to improve a bit w/o moving up in stakes, but might still see an increase in $$/hand. The trouble is that you may find that you're only break even at the higher stakes, and need to sit lower for a while longer to figure more stuff out while still increasing your BR.

If you move up and find that you're actually break even, but a slight winner, then you may consider depositing more in your account to have a bit more of a cushion on your BR. You may be more comfortable being a slight winner at higher stakes with the opportunity to study this next level of players than a big winner at the lower stakes where you are mostly button mashing.

Thanks MMM, that's the sort of input I was looking for.

The general rule of thumb here is to have a bankroll >= 100 buy-ins